Article: Should Anyone Actually Be Untouchable?

[Hugh2]

51 minutes ago, notin said:

This argument goes beyond Straw Man, right past Stick Man and directly to Brick Man on the Three Little Pigs scale.

Alcantara is an elite talent, but his backloaded contract is entering the two priciest years, a point where Miami quite often sells.  Arguments that they might want him to pitch to increase his value are easily offset by arguments they don’t want to risk him pitching and being ineffective or getting hurt again.  
 

Now I’m not sure he is actually available, but if he is, the post TJS surgery risk, while not non-existent, is certainly not high based on plenty of league wide data.  And said risk is probably less than the success rate of even top prospects living up to their hype.

With his third very affordable option year, Alcantara should absolutely be worth dealing even Campbell for. I would be hesitant if they insisted on Anthony, but not necessarily immediately out…

So you'd trade 6 years of a guy who might be the best player on your team for the next 6 years for 2 years of a pitcher with injury concerns?

 

So what do you do in 2027? now you're down a pitcher again, and you have an additional hole to fill because you've traded away Campbell+

and it will be plus, a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.  I don't care what BTV says but Campbell gets you 1/2 way there.  

This team sucks because they don't want to spend money, not spending money creates holes, trading everyone away plugs those holes up for a year or two, but developing them can at least buy you a 6 year window at some point. 

I would be upset if they don't spend money this year, but I'd consider it a much bigger insult and slap in the face to Sox fans to trade away their future that they've endured 4 years of suck for for a guy that will be on this team for 2-3 years.  I'm sorry, If I'm trading for a guy I'm extending him.  

If you're not extending a guy it's not worth trading for him.  That's my argument, any no man made outa straw in that. 

[Hugh2]

1 hour ago, moonslav59 said:

I don't disagree, but we don't have to give top everyday prospects for 1-2 years of a pitcher or 3+ years of an aging starter.

We could give several everyday prospects for a young SP'er, even if it is an "overpay."

We need to balance our strengths and weakness, somehow, someway and SOMETIME- like how about now?

We've heard Mayer's name. Casas and Abreu. Farther away guys like Cespedes, Bleis, Arias or JH Garcia. Others like Meidroth, Arias and Romero could be additions. 

In short, we can make a trade that helps fill a need for 2025 AND beyond, at the same time.

SEA traded for Castillo and extended him.

MN traded for Pablo Lopez and extended him.

Word is Cease is on the market. Crochet is out there.

Just do it! We can't play 16 vets and ML-ready prospects, at the same time.

Moon....how can you possibly look at what's going on in the market and still undersell the cost of pitching?

Put yourself in a teams position holding onto an ACE with two years of control.  I would demand a teams top prospect, or one of their top prospects for them.  And if we don't pay it someone else will.  

We keep losing these free agents because there's always ONE team willing to spend more.  The trade market works the same way.  If the front office has that mentality they will get beat out for trades as well. 

And we will be sitting here twiddling our thumbs come March talking about how this is the year Nick Pivetta becomes and ACE. 

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, notin said:

I think Alcantara is much less of a gamble than Burnes or Fried…

True. The guys has put in 4 full seasons- two really good, one pretty good, and 2023 not bad, at all.

2019: 32 GS, 197 IP (110 ERA+) age 23

2021: 33 GS, 206 IP (132 ERA+) age 25

2022: 32 GS, 229 IP (180 ERA+ WOW!) age 26

2023: 28 GS, 185 IP (113 ERA+) age 27

He will turn 30, next September.

ERA+ since 2020:

114 in 719 IP Pablo Lopez (turns 29 in March and has 3 years of control)

120 in 780 IP Castillo (Turns 32, tomorrow with 3 years of control)

128 in 219 IP Crochet (turns 26 in June- 2 years of control)

138 in 661 IP Alcantara

142 in 817 IP Burnes (1 year older than Sandy.)

151 in 659 IP Fried (almost 2 yrs older than Sandy) less IP since 2020

[moonslav59]

5 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Moon....how can you possibly look at what's going on in the market and still undersell the cost of pitching?

Put yourself in a teams position holding onto an ACE with two years of control.  I would demand a teams top prospect, or one of their top prospects for them.  And if we don't pay it someone else will.  

We keep losing these free agents because there's always ONE team willing to spend more.  The trade market works the same way.  If the front office has that mentality they will get beat out for trades as well. 

And we will be sitting here twiddling our thumbs come March talking about how this is the year Nick Pivetta becomes and ACE. 

I wasn't talking about just an ace. Trade 3 everyday players for a good pitcher, even if the total value exchange is an overpay.

I've mentioned I'd give up Mayer for 2 years of Crochet, despite the fact that he never pitched over 65 innings until 2024- even in college. (I'd even add secondary prospects.)

I think I have suggested fairly nice packages for Crochet, Lopez and Castillo. If you look at the BTV numbers, many would not be accepted due to gross overpays by me as the Sox GM.

For example, I do not think Miller and Woo are as good as their SEA numbers indicate, but I do think they are better than Crawford, Bello and Gio. Neither is an ace or ever will be, yet I'd offer Casas and Abreu plus Fitts or Sandlin, if needed. You think this is undervaluing pitching?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I gotta go with Hugh, here. The Red Sox are jesters of the industry for being Interest Kings, but they would be total losers if they went this far hoarding young talent, and then traded anyone on the brink of really making it.

What we can count on are more surplus deals cleaning out the system of what they deem mid-level prospects: Yorke, Lugo, Paulino, Kavadas -- which will continue to supply them with surplus mound mediocrity... and the hopes of harnessing one or two ponies into horses someday.

[notin]

7 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

So you'd trade 6 years of a guy who might be the best player on your team for the next 6 years for 2 years of a pitcher with injury concerns?

 

So what do you do in 2027? now you're down a pitcher again, and you have an additional hole to fill because you've traded away Campbell+

and it will be plus, a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.  I don't care what BTV says but Campbell gets you 1/2 way there.  

This team sucks because they don't want to spend money, not spending money creates holes, trading everyone away plugs those holes up for a year or two, but developing them can at least buy you a 6 year window at some point. 

I would be upset if they don't spend money this year, but I'd consider it a much bigger insult and slap in the face to Sox fans to trade away their future that they've endured 4 years of suck for for a guy that will be on this team for 2-3 years.  I'm sorry, If I'm trading for a guy I'm extending him.  

If you're not extending a guy it's not worth trading for him.  That's my argument, any no man made outa straw in that. 

So you’d avoid acquiring THREE YEARS (not two) a Cy Young winning pitcher on the off chance that a minor league prospect is going to be the best player on the team? 
 

Campbell’s  stats in the upper minors are roughly equal to Grissom’s and at the same ages.  Why do you think their career paths will be so different?

 

[Hugh2]

1 minute ago, moonslav59 said:

I wasn't talking about just an ace. Trade 3 everyday players for a good pitcher, even if the total value exchange is an overpay.

I've mentioned I'd give up Mayer for 2 years of Crochet, despite the fact that he never pitched over 65 innings until 2024- even in college. (I'd even add secondary prospects.)

I think I have suggested fairly nice packages for Crochet, Lopez and Castillo. If you look at the BTV numbers, many would not be accepted due to gross overpays by me as the Sox GM.

For example, I do not think Miller and Woo are as good as their SEA numbers indicate, but I do think they are better than Crawford, Bello and Gio. Neither is an ace or ever will be, yet I'd offer Casas and Abreu plus Fitts or Sandlin, if needed. You think this is undervaluing pitching?

You said we don't have to give up top prospects for 1-2 years for a pitcher.  I disagree, certainly for two years I disagree.  For two years, someone is giving up one of their top prospects. 

[harmony]

3 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

I wasn't talking about just an ace. Trade 3 everyday players for a good pitcher, even if the total value exchange is an overpay.

I've mentioned I'd give up Mayer for 2 years of Crochet, despite the fact that he never pitched over 65 innings until 2024- even in college. (I'd even add secondary prospects.)

I think I have suggested fairly nice packages for Crochet, Lopez and Castillo. If you look at the BTV numbers, many would not be accepted due to gross overpays by me as the Sox GM.

For example, I do not think Miller and Woo are as good as their SEA numbers indicate, but I do think they are better than Crawford, Bello and Gio. Neither is an ace or ever will be, yet I'd offer Casas and Abreu plus Fitts or Sandlin, if needed. You think this is undervaluing pitching?

One debate in Seattle is whether Bryce Miller and Bryan Woo have peaked after less than two MLB seasons or whether the young, controllable right-handers have only scratched their potential.

[Hugh2]

3 minutes ago, notin said:

So you’d avoid acquiring THREE YEARS (not two) a Cy Young winning pitcher on the off chance that a minor league prospect is going to be the best player on the team? 
 

Campbell’s  stats in the upper minors are roughly equal to Grissom’s and at the same ages.  Why do you think their career paths will be so different?

 

No.  

I recognize that teams that win have more than one good player on them.   Even teams like LA have young cost controlled talent around their premium paid stars. 

And if I'm trading those guys I want control, or a guy who is going to sign an extension.  Given how low their payroll got this offseason coupled with having a top heavy MLB ready strong farm (#1 by some measure) It makes all the sense in the world to me to go out and just pay guys.  WTF would I want to trade all my prospects for a guy I'm just going to have to pay anyways?

If people want to justify Henry's penny pinching and champion never signing premium free agents then that's their prerogative, but I'd like to be competitive again. 

 

What makes you think Cambell and Grissom are the same? Also, why give up on Grissom? he's still young, but what was his highest ranking?

[Bellhorn04]

1 hour ago, notin said:

He’s been a consistent 3 bWAR player over his career…

Yes, like I said, above average, which is 2 bWAR.

[notin]

31 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

No.  

I recognize that teams that win have more than one good player on them.   Even teams like LA have young cost controlled talent around their premium paid stars. 

And if I'm trading those guys I want control, or a guy who is going to sign an extension.  Given how low their payroll got this offseason coupled with having a top heavy MLB ready strong farm (#1 by some measure) It makes all the sense in the world to me to go out and just pay guys.  WTF would I want to trade all my prospects for a guy I'm just going to have to pay anyways?

If people want to justify Henry's penny pinching and champion never signing premium free agents then that's their prerogative, but I'd like to be competitive again. 

 

What makes you think Cambell and Grissom are the same? Also, why give up on Grissom? he's still young, but what was his highest ranking?

Actually LA is one of, if not the best practitioners of dumpster diving out there, filling their roster with All Star utility infielders cut from the benches of other teams, like Max Muncy, Justin Turner, Enrique Gonzalez, Chris Taylor, Miguel Rojas, Jamey Carroll, etc. and even adding length to their bullpen with rejects like Ryan Brasier, Ryan Yarborough, Daniel Hudson.  They even add oft-injured pitchers to their rotation, through both trades (Tyler Glasnow) and free agency (James Paxton).  In short, they do EVERYTHING that Sox fans hate to see Boston do.

 

Know what they rarely do?  Give huge 7/8 year deals to SPs, with two notable exceptions being Ohtani (who is obviously more than a pitcher) and Yamamoto (who was only 25 at the time).  Even Kershaw has been working through multiple short deals.  They did go big on Bauer, but for a very short contract.

 

Most starting pitchers by the time they reach free agency simply do not have 7-8 years left in them, making them short term solutions that require a long term commitment.  I’d rather gamble on a shorter term pitcher and give up the occasional top prospect, and part of that is because even top prospects rarely become top players.  And I also like having the flexibility to extend the ones that do.

 

Also, no one suggested reading “all the prospects” for a pitcher with two years left.  This was about trading ONE prospect for a pitcher with 3 years left,  including an affordable option…

[mvp 78]

34 minutes ago, notin said:

So you’d avoid acquiring THREE YEARS (not two) a Cy Young winning pitcher on the off chance that a minor league prospect is going to be the best player on the team? 
 

Campbell’s  stats in the upper minors are roughly equal to Grissom’s and at the same ages.  Why do you think their career paths will be so different?

 

I disagree that the MiLB stats are roughly equivalent. 

Campbell 2024: 20 HR

Grissom 22 and 23 combined: 22 HR

Plus, the questions about Grissom's glove were shown to be well founded while he was in WOO last year. Campbell is a better defender and has a much clearer power projection. Grissom has been a waning prospect ever since he peaked at 22 in 2020. 

 

[mvp 78]

20 minutes ago, Bellhorn04 said:

Yes, like I said, above average, which is 2 bWAR.

Need to empty the farm for above average guys. 

[mvp 78]

13 minutes ago, notin said:

Also, no one suggested reading “all the prospects” for a pitcher with two years left.  This was about trading ONE prospect for a pitcher with 3 years left,  including an affordable option…

Two years with a club option, right? 

[Hugh2]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

Actually LA is one of, if not the best practitioners of dumpster diving out there, filling their roster with All Star utility infielders cut from the benches of other teams, like Max Muncy, Justin Turner, Enrique Gonzalez, Chris Taylor, Miguel Rojas, Jamey Carroll, etc. and even adding length to their bullpen with rejects like Ryan Brasier, Ryan Yarborough, Daniel Hudson.  They even add oft-injured pitchers to their rotation, through both trades (Tyler Glasnow) and free agency (James Paxton).  In short, they do EVERYTHING that Sox fans hate to see Boston do.

 

Know what they rarely do?  Give huge 7/8 year deals to SPs, with two notable exceptions being Ohtani (who is obviously more than a pitcher) and Yamamoto (who was only 25 at the time).  Even Kershaw has been working through multiple short deals.  They did go big on Bauer, but for a very short contract.

 

Most starting pitchers by the time they reach free agency simply do not have 7-8 years left in them, making them short term solutions that require a long term commitment.  I’d rather gamble on a shorter term pitcher and give up the occasional top prospect, and part of that is because even top prospects rarely become top players.  And I also like having the flexibility to extend the ones that do.

 

Also, no one suggested reading “all the prospects” for a pitcher with two years left.  This was about trading ONE prospect for a pitcher with 3 years left,  including an affordable option…

Yes and LA actually pays free agents premium money too.  Corey Klubers are a lot easier to hide when you also signed Max Frieds of the world.

[moonslav59]

51 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

You said we don't have to give up top prospects for 1-2 years for a pitcher.  I disagree, certainly for two years I disagree.  For two years, someone is giving up one of their top prospects. 

I'll give Mayer for Crochet. I did say that a while ago, though. You are right.

We can get a pitcher not as good as Crochet without a top prospect being involved.

[notin]

11 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Two years with a club option, right? 

Yes.  $17 mill guaranteed in ‘25 and ‘26 with another year at $17mill or a $2.5mill buyout.  Team option…

[notin]

9 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Yes and LA actually pays free agents premium money too.  Corey Klubers are a lot easier to hide when you also signed Max Frieds of the world.

But what’s the longest deal to an MLB free agent SP the Dodgers have ever given out?  They aren’t signing Max Fried types to pitch throughout their 30s…

[Larry Cook]

Atlanta is looking for a veteran short stop and an outfielder! They have two pitchers on the verge of the majors! One replaces fried, maybe bres-slow is interested in the other and another pitching prospect 

[Hugh2]

15 minutes ago, notin said:

But what’s the longest deal to an MLB free agent SP the Dodgers have ever given out?  They aren’t signing Max Fried types to pitch throughout their 30s…

Are you seriously trying to make the argument that the Dodgers don't spend heavily on free agency???  

[Hugh2]

17 minutes ago, notin said:

But what’s the longest deal to an MLB free agent SP the Dodgers have ever given out?  They aren’t signing Max Fried types to pitch throughout their 30s…

Oh, but to answer your question.  It's 12 years and that was just last year. 

[notin]

45 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

I disagree that the MiLB stats are roughly equivalent. 

Campbell 2024: 20 HR

Grissom 22 and 23 combined: 22 HR

Plus, the questions about Grissom's glove were shown to be well founded while he was in WOO last year. Campbell is a better defender and has a much clearer power projection. Grissom has been a waning prospect ever since he peaked at 22 in 2020. 

 

Grissom had a .921 OPS in AAA over 450 PA at age 22 in 2023.  Not sure I classify that as waning…

[moonslav59]

I'm fine with a DHAM-Grissom platoon at 2B, if we fix other bigger holes- like an ace, a closer and a catcher who can catch.

[drewski6]

Yall might want to check MLB trade rumors,

Bout to land Crochet for a prospect package headlined by Teel

[moonslav59]

2 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Yall might want to check MLB trade rumors,

Bout to land Crochet for a prospect package headlined by Teel

Although I think Mayer is better than Teel, I think I'd rather keep the catcher, since Wong looks so scary behind the plate.

Now, we need a catcher, badly.

[Hugh2]

56 minutes ago, notin said:

But what’s the longest deal to an MLB free agent SP the Dodgers have ever given out?  They aren’t signing Max Fried types to pitch throughout their 30s…

Because they're developing Clayton Kershaws, Julio Urias, and Walker Buehlers.

If Tanner Houck, Bryan Bello, and Crawford were on that level do you think we'd be sitting around here having the same conversation?

Every teams needs are different but the strategy is sound.  Lock up your young talent, invest in free agency where you have holes.  If you don't want to be the highest bidder then be ok eating s*** for dinner, because that's all you'll get......left overs.  

Or Garret Crochet, lets see what the extension looks like. 

[Hugh2]

30 minutes ago, notin said:

Grissom had a .921 OPS in AAA over 450 PA at age 22 in 2023.  Not sure I classify that as waning…

Are AAA stats predictive of what a guys MLB career will be? Bobby Dalbec is calling....he wants his MVP. 

[mvp 78]

1 hour ago, notin said:

Grissom had a .921 OPS in AAA over 450 PA at age 22 in 2023.  Not sure I classify that as waning…

8 HR in 102 G. It's waning because his actual prospect ranking kept falling every year. 

[mvp 78]

59 minutes ago, Hugh2 said:

Are AAA stats predictive of what a guys MLB career will be? Bobby Dalbec is calling....he wants his MVP. 

Dalbec could at least hit the ball over the fence.

[Hugh2]

9 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Dalbec could at least hit the ball over the fence.

True, Grissom isn't much of a power guy.  Campbell is, not like Bobby but the kid has pop